And yet, the SS parade at Fenway continues. while Jeter is an immortal, admittedly one with limited range, especially to his left.

I have been highly critical of Sox fielding at SS over the years as well. This is not about me not liking the Yankees. It is about only Jeter's overall fielding being very bad as a result of him being the worst ranged SS in MLB over the past decade. Range is a huge protion of a SSs defense. His sure-handedness and great arm from the cut-off position helps him from being the worst fielding SS with significant games played, in the history of MLB.

(This yr is bound to be scary worse.) There is more to SS than that, and I'm not talking about the bat.

Yes, he is a great on the field leader and has a great cutoff arm, but that's not enough to leapfrog him over several bad SSs.

The Torre book went into this in detail, which included his limitations.

I'd have loved Jeter on my team for the last 18 years... as my 3Bman or 2Bman.

His first 8-10 years might be justified as a SS, but to me, clearly he was a negative on defense. I'm not saying that negative outweighed all the other positives, but I am only talking fielding, and more specifically, limited range vs superior range, and how that makes a big difference over a full season.

Setting the bar for "earning it" based on hitting over some arbitrary number, is losing baseball. Sure, he can't hit .075 and be a plus (I guess I just did it myself), but the argument here seems to be over how much impact a great ranged SS can have vs an average or below average ranged SS, and how that compares to the offensive side of the equation.

I happen to think Iggy could "save" 50-100 hits over Drew this year. Drew will probably get 25-75 more hits that Iggy over 550 PAs, and several more will be for extra base hits. I see it as, at worst, being a toss-up. I don't see that Iggy spending another year in AAA will help his offense anymore than spending a full year in MLB- maybe we differ there too, but the balance tipper is the $9.5M. Even if you think Drew is slightly better than Iggy, the $9.5M could have helped us upgrade elsewhere and made us a better overall team.

Our pitching staff will need all the help it can get, and a great-ranged SS is the best place to start after the acquisition of D Ross at catcher. 50-100 hits saved shortens innings, helps starters go longer into games, boosts their confidence, improves team moral, and helps win games as much or more than getting an extra hit every 4-5 games.

And yet, the SS parade at Fenway continues. while Jeter is an immortal, admittedly one with limited range, especially to his left.

I have been highly critical of Sox fielding at SS over the years as well. This is not about me not liking the Yankees. It is about only Jeter's overall fielding being very bad as a result of him being the worst ranged SS in MLB over the past decade. Range is a huge protion of a SSs defense. His sure-handedness and great arm from the cut-off position helps him from being the worst fielding SS with significant games played, in the history of MLB.

(This yr is bound to be scary worse.) There is more to SS than that, and I'm not talking about the bat.

Yes, he is a great on the field leader and has a great cutoff arm, but that's not enough to leapfrog him over several bad SSs.

The Torre book went into this in detail, which included his limitations.

But Kimmi, moon is the guy who has trotted out the 'just watch the games, it's easy to see' line a few times in this thread. Here are a few of his statements:

It's not about the numbers. Just watch the game. It is easy to see plays made every game by great-ranged SSs that other SSs can't even make in their dreams. For years I have watched the opponent's SSs make play after play against us that our SSs never make. It may not be easily quantifiable, but it doesn't make it any less real.

It's about the hundreds of plays he doesn't make that you must not notice.

It's not a miscvonception: Jeter is the worst fielding SS over the last decade. Nobody else with a large enough sample size is even close. There is ample evidence to back this up, and I have seen him play over 200 games.

So maybe 'most people' can't see these plays, but moon claims that he does. So I think it was a fair question to him.

Nobody remember specific plays that someone doesn't make, but I'd be happy to sit down with you and watch any 10 game sample and point out plays that could have been made by a superior defensive SS. I do it every year with Sox SSs. I actually started doing it last April, because I was sure that Aviles was an average to slightly poor-ranged SS, and I wanted Iggy to play FT. I quickly realized I was wrong about Aviles. The numbers backed up my new found opinion: Mike was not a bad ranged SS at all, in fact, he had a good season in 2013, in terms of range.

My observations of Jeter have not been casual. I have always watched the defensive SS position since I played the game many many years ago. I played 2B next to one of the best defensive SSs I have ever seen live. It was then I realized how much a great fielding SS can change the game... win games. I'm not saying I am a better observer than you, and I know you have watched Jeter much more than I. I could be wrong. The numbers could be wrong. The UZR/150 metric could be terribly off, but I will go to my grave believing that I have not seen a MLB with a ton of innings played have such poor range. The numbers overwhelmingly support my position, and that's enough for me to believe it as fact.

Where is one shred of evidence that shows Jeter had even average range over the last decade? Remember, saying average range is a comparative analysis, so you can't just say, "I watched thousands of Jeter games, so I know better than you", since you haven't watched thousands of games by any other specific MLb SS, let alone 29 other ones. This is one reason why, when comparing players, stats and metrics take on greater worth than personal observations. Other than Sox SSs, I have watched more games by Jter than any other SS. The Yanks are always on TV. They make the playoffs more than other teams. I try to make it to many Sox-yanks games, even ones in NY. I also watch the Yanks when they come to Houston or on TV vs Houston, and have seen them play in other cities as well-live. I've probably seen about 250 Jeter games over the last 10 years. Have you seen any other specific SS play 250 games over the past 10 years? You are criticizing me for basing my comparative judgement of Jeter on a smaller sample size than yours, but the same argument can be made vs your perceptions of other ML SSs.

The Torre book went into this in detail, which included his limitations.

I didn't read it.

Perhaps, but why discuss this as often as you do?

I state what I believe, and this is a hot topic for many posters. I have responded to responses and criticisms of my methodology and beliefs.

yes, I have done this more often than I probably should have, but I enjoy talking baseball in my retirement.

OK.

And while this is silly, did you know that Strat-O-Matic gave Jeter the highest possible fielding rating for roughly the 1st 10 yrs of his career? They are also very conservative about giving out this rating. Neither here nor there, of course. The only point is, there are two camps regardig him, and while I think the new metrics are flawed (See Roberto Alomar for a few yrs, Don Wert, John Vuckovich, John Kennedy, Wes Parker, Don Mattingly, Omar Vizquel, Bobby Richardson, Mark Belanger, and other supreme fielders); they cannot be ignored.

Hence my "postage stamp range" remark; it fits to a tee, Amazing they're not moving him out of that position this yr; it shows what a shambles they are.

The Torre book went into this in detail, which included his limitations.

I didn't read it.

Perhaps, but why discuss this as often as you do?

I state what I believe, and this is a hot topic for many posters. I have responded to responses and criticisms of my methodology and beliefs.

yes, I have done this more often than I probably should have, but I enjoy talking baseball in my retirement.

OK.

And while this is silly, did you know that Strat-O-Matic gave Jeter the highest possible fielding rating for roughly the 1st 10 yrs of his career? They are also very conservative about giving out this rating. Neither here nor there, of course. The only point is, there are two camps regardig him, and while I think the new metrics are flawed (See Roberto Alomar for a few yrs, Don Wert, John Vuckovich, John Kennedy, Wes Parker, Don Mattingly, Omar Vizquel, Bobby Richardson, Mark Belanger, and other supreme fielders); they cannot be ignored.

Hence my "postage stamp range" remark; it fits to a tee, Amazing they're not moving him out of that position this yr; it shows what a shambles they are.

UZR/150 was not around in teh days of many of these players, including Jeter pre-2002. I have been very careful in only talking about Jeter since 2003.

I thought they should have kept ARod at SS, and moved jeter to 3B way back when, but ARod's D went bad as well.

They will not move jeter until he is ready to move himself... or retire. The same went for keeping Ripken playing everyday seeking the record, even when it clearly hurt the team. They are icons and untouchable.

Where is one shred of evidence that shows Jeter had even average range over the last decade? Remember, saying average range is a comparative analysis, so you can't just say, "I watched thousands of Jeter games, so I know better than you", since you haven't watched thousands of games by any other specific MLb SS, let alone 29 other ones. This is one reason why, when comparing players, stats and metrics take on greater worth than personal observations. Other than Sox SSs, I have watched more games by Jter than any other SS. The Yanks are always on TV. They make the playoffs more than other teams. I try to make it to many Sox-yanks games, even ones in NY. I also watch the Yanks when they come to Houston or on TV vs Houston, and have seen them play in other cities as well-live. I've probably seen about 250 Jeter games over the last 10 years. Have you seen any other specific SS play 250 games over the past 10 years? You are criticizing me for basing my comparative judgement of Jeter on a smaller sample size than yours, but the same argument can be made vs your perceptions of other ML SSs.

My position is pretty simple, I think. I'm asking for examples of specific plays that Jeter didn't make, and I'm confining it to games against the Red Sox because we get to see most of those games.

Setting the bar for "earning it" based on hitting over some arbitrary number, is losing baseball. Sure, he can't hit .075 and be a plus (I guess I just did it myself), but the argument here seems to be over how much impact a great ranged SS can have vs an average or below average ranged SS, and how that compares to the offensive side of the equation.

I happen to think Iggy could "save" 50-100 hits over Drew this year. Drew will probably get 25-75 more hits that Iggy over 550 PAs, and several more will be for extra base hits. I see it as, at worst, being a toss-up. I don't see that Iggy spending another year in AAA will help his offense anymore than spending a full year in MLB- maybe we differ there too, but the balance tipper is the $9.5M. Even if you think Drew is slightly better than Iggy, the $9.5M could have helped us upgrade elsewhere and made us a better overall team.

Our pitching staff will need all the help it can get, and a great-ranged SS is the best place to start after the acquisition of D Ross at catcher. 50-100 hits saved shortens innings, helps starters go longer into games, boosts their confidence, improves team moral, and helps win games as much or more than getting an extra hit every 4-5 games.

Drew will likely have 50-100 more total bases than Iggy too so i think that makes up for the "hits saved" differential. Those extra bases will extend rallies, shorten opposing starters outings, tap into opposing BPs earlier, boost his confidence, improve team moral and help win games as much or more than saving a hit every few games.

Also, Drew wasn't signed until the pitching staff was rounded out.. and it's not like that 10Mil is holding them up at all. If they had a different pitcher in mind who would have cost us that 10 Mil they would have bit on it and not even looked at Drew. They know the pitching needs help moreso than our SS situation. They just felt Dempster was the best option for what we needed (reliable Vet on a short term deal). Once the pitching was rounded out they looked at the SS situation and felt Iggy still wasn't ready (understandable) so they went after Drew..

Drew will likely have 50-100 more total bases than Iggy too so i think that makes up for the "hits saved" differential. Those extra bases will extend rallies, shorten opposing starters outings, tap into opposing BPs earlier, boost his confidence, improve team moral and help win games as much or more than saving a hit every few games.

I agreed that at worst, they'd both probably even out, but that one costs $9.5M more and does not do much to help the staff.

Also, Drew wasn't signed until the pitching staff was rounded out.. and it's not like that 10Mil is holding them up at all. If they had a different pitcher in mind who would have cost us that 10 Mil they would have bit on it and not even looked at Drew. They know the pitching needs help moreso than our SS situation. They just felt Dempster was the best option for what we needed (reliable Vet on a short term deal). Once the pitching was rounded out they looked at the SS situation and felt Iggy still wasn't ready (understandable) so they went after Drew..

I certainly hope Ben made an overall plan before making any signings, but I realize unforeseen things happen. He could have decided he was going to go with Iggy, Ciriaco, and Holt (and maybe even Bogaerts at some point) and then he'd have known he'd have more money to spend on a better SP or LF'er, or RF'er, or Catcher, or even gotten another SP that would hav eallowed him to trade Doubront or a couple relief pitchers to upgrade elsewhere, including teh farm.

The fact is, Ben made SS for 2013 a pretty high priority at the expense of other more needy positions.

Drew will likely have 50-100 more total bases than Iggy too so i think that makes up for the "hits saved" differential. Those extra bases will extend rallies, shorten opposing starters outings, tap into opposing BPs earlier, boost his confidence, improve team moral and help win games as much or more than saving a hit every few games.

I agreed that at worst, they'd both probably even out, but that one costs $9.5M more and does not do much to help the staff.

Also, Drew wasn't signed until the pitching staff was rounded out.. and it's not like that 10Mil is holding them up at all. If they had a different pitcher in mind who would have cost us that 10 Mil they would have bit on it and not even looked at Drew. They know the pitching needs help moreso than our SS situation. They just felt Dempster was the best option for what we needed (reliable Vet on a short term deal). Once the pitching was rounded out they looked at the SS situation and felt Iggy still wasn't ready (understandable) so they went after Drew..

I certainly hope Ben made an overall plan before making any signings, but I realize unforeseen things happen. He could have decided he was going to go with Iggy, Ciriaco, and Holt (and maybe even Bogaerts at some point) and then he'd have known he'd have more money to spend on a better SP or LF'er, or RF'er, or Catcher, or even gotten another SP that would hav eallowed him to trade Doubront or a couple relief pitchers to upgrade elsewhere, including teh farm.

The fact is, Ben made SS for 2013 a pretty high priority at the expense of other more needy positions.

BC probably saw what i saw this offseason... there were no SP worth investing into that weren't HUGE "??s" or compromised our long term goals. So instead of chancing it on marcum or mcCarthy or Haren, shelling out too many dollars and/or years on Sanchez (overrated IMO) or Grienke or Edwin, Losing a draft pick by signing Loshe etc... He went with Dempster, With all the injuries we've had in the recent years it will be nice to know we have at least 1 dependable starter who can give us around 200 innings and even mentor some of the younger guys.

Next years SP FAs on the other hand....... WHOOOOOOOOO! that's worth investing in (DOC!).

but i also get where BC is coming from not trusting the starting SS job to Iggy who only has 1 month of decent AAA hitting under his belt. While i think we overpaid for Drew i'm not too worried about our money spent this offseason.. With the expectation that we will have a bunch of prospects joining the team (at low low cost) in the next 2 years and also the big heap of cash coming off the books in the time period i really don't care how much we spent this offseason because we will not likely be in financial trouble in the long term.. Which is why i am not worried about the overpays. if we have to move a guy we won't hesitate to eat their contract because we are cost controlled in the upcoming years. If Iggy steps up and refines his offense it will be simple to ship Drew out and give Iggy his spot. So it is a win-win really. We hedged our bets at SS.. If Iggy pans out, no big deal, eat a couple Mil on Drews deal and say sayanara. If not, we won't be stuck with an abysmal offensive SS killing rallies with no clear upgrade (and yes, Drew is a clear upgrade). Same goes for Dempster, if one of our young pitchers excells and deserves to be in the MLB we can eat part of his deal and move him back to the NL OR ship doobie out (to the BP even). If we want to sign a marquee SP next offseason and our rotation is rounded out (our current 5) we can easily ship someone out and eat part of their contract without fear of hamstringing ourselves with payroll tied up in other teams. If that puts us over the luxury tax threshold in 2014 (or 2013 for that matter) no big deal all that money is freed up by 2015 anyway...... No matter how you slice it We have flexibility going forward and that is one of our biggest assets.

Drew will likely have 50-100 more total bases than Iggy too so i think that makes up for the "hits saved" differential. Those extra bases will extend rallies, shorten opposing starters outings, tap into opposing BPs earlier, boost his confidence, improve team moral and help win games as much or more than saving a hit every few games.

I agreed that at worst, they'd both probably even out, but that one costs $9.5M more and does not do much to help the staff.

Also, Drew wasn't signed until the pitching staff was rounded out.. and it's not like that 10Mil is holding them up at all. If they had a different pitcher in mind who would have cost us that 10 Mil they would have bit on it and not even looked at Drew. They know the pitching needs help moreso than our SS situation. They just felt Dempster was the best option for what we needed (reliable Vet on a short term deal). Once the pitching was rounded out they looked at the SS situation and felt Iggy still wasn't ready (understandable) so they went after Drew..

I certainly hope Ben made an overall plan before making any signings, but I realize unforeseen things happen. He could have decided he was going to go with Iggy, Ciriaco, and Holt (and maybe even Bogaerts at some point) and then he'd have known he'd have more money to spend on a better SP or LF'er, or RF'er, or Catcher, or even gotten another SP that would hav eallowed him to trade Doubront or a couple relief pitchers to upgrade elsewhere, including teh farm.

The fact is, Ben made SS for 2013 a pretty high priority at the expense of other more needy positions.

BC probably saw what i saw this offseason... there were no SP worth investing into that weren't HUGE "??s" or compromised our long term goals. So instead of chancing it on marcum or mcCarthy or Haren, shelling out too many dollars and/or years on Sanchez (overrated IMO) or Grienke or Edwin, Losing a draft pick by signing Loshe etc... He went with Dempster, With all the injuries we've had in the recent years it will be nice to know we have at least 1 dependable starter who can give us around 200 innings and even mentor some of the younger guys.

Next years SP FAs on the other hand....... WHOOOOOOOOO! that's worth investing in (DOC!).

but i also get where BC is coming from not trusting the starting SS job to Iggy who only has 1 month of decent AAA hitting under his belt. While i think we overpaid for Drew i'm not too worried about our money spent this offseason.. With the expectation that we will have a bunch of prospects joining the team (at low low cost) in the next 2 years and also the big heap of cash coming off the books in the time period i really don't care how much we spent this offseason because we will not likely be in financial trouble in the long term.. Which is why i am not worried about the overpays. if we have to move a guy we won't hesitate to eat their contract because we are cost controlled in the upcoming years. If Iggy steps up and refines his offense it will be simple to ship Drew out and give Iggy his spot. So it is a win-win really. We hedged our bets at SS.. If Iggy pans out, no big deal, eat a couple Mil on Drews deal and say sayanara. If not, we won't be stuck with an abysmal offensive SS killing rallies with no clear upgrade (and yes, Drew is a clear upgrade). Same goes for Dempster, if one of our young pitchers excells and deserves to be in the MLB we can eat part of his deal and move him back to the NL OR ship doobie out (to the BP even). If we want to sign a marquee SP next offseason and our rotation is rounded out (our current 5) we can easily ship someone out and eat part of their contract without fear of hamstringing ourselves with payroll tied up in other teams. If that puts us over the luxury tax threshold in 2014 (or 2013 for that matter) no big deal all that money is freed up by 2015 anyway...... No matter how you slice it We have flexibility going forward and that is one of our biggest assets.

Free agency was not the only way to get a quality SP, and I understand the innings thing with Dempster. I get what Ben was up to, but I disagree on one thing: he did nothing proactive for the future this winter. Keeping all the prospects and draft picks was nice, but it did not make us better. All of the FAs signed will be gone or past prime by 2014 and 2015. We can not count on all of the FAs on next years list to still be available. many players extend these days.

I just can't accept that with all the money spent, not one dime helps us in 2015 or beyond, except maybe a little from SV or what we might get by trading one of these guys. I see this as a missed opportunity in a plan that seeks to make us highly competitive by 2015.

Drew will likely have 50-100 more total bases than Iggy too so i think that makes up for the "hits saved" differential. Those extra bases will extend rallies, shorten opposing starters outings, tap into opposing BPs earlier, boost his confidence, improve team moral and help win games as much or more than saving a hit every few games.

I agreed that at worst, they'd both probably even out, but that one costs $9.5M more and does not do much to help the staff.

Also, Drew wasn't signed until the pitching staff was rounded out.. and it's not like that 10Mil is holding them up at all. If they had a different pitcher in mind who would have cost us that 10 Mil they would have bit on it and not even looked at Drew. They know the pitching needs help moreso than our SS situation. They just felt Dempster was the best option for what we needed (reliable Vet on a short term deal). Once the pitching was rounded out they looked at the SS situation and felt Iggy still wasn't ready (understandable) so they went after Drew..

I certainly hope Ben made an overall plan before making any signings, but I realize unforeseen things happen. He could have decided he was going to go with Iggy, Ciriaco, and Holt (and maybe even Bogaerts at some point) and then he'd have known he'd have more money to spend on a better SP or LF'er, or RF'er, or Catcher, or even gotten another SP that would hav eallowed him to trade Doubront or a couple relief pitchers to upgrade elsewhere, including teh farm.

The fact is, Ben made SS for 2013 a pretty high priority at the expense of other more needy positions.

BC probably saw what i saw this offseason... there were no SP worth investing into that weren't HUGE "??s" or compromised our long term goals. So instead of chancing it on marcum or mcCarthy or Haren, shelling out too many dollars and/or years on Sanchez (overrated IMO) or Grienke or Edwin, Losing a draft pick by signing Loshe etc... He went with Dempster, With all the injuries we've had in the recent years it will be nice to know we have at least 1 dependable starter who can give us around 200 innings and even mentor some of the younger guys.

Next years SP FAs on the other hand....... WHOOOOOOOOO! that's worth investing in (DOC!).

but i also get where BC is coming from not trusting the starting SS job to Iggy who only has 1 month of decent AAA hitting under his belt. While i think we overpaid for Drew i'm not too worried about our money spent this offseason.. With the expectation that we will have a bunch of prospects joining the team (at low low cost) in the next 2 years and also the big heap of cash coming off the books in the time period i really don't care how much we spent this offseason because we will not likely be in financial trouble in the long term.. Which is why i am not worried about the overpays. if we have to move a guy we won't hesitate to eat their contract because we are cost controlled in the upcoming years. If Iggy steps up and refines his offense it will be simple to ship Drew out and give Iggy his spot. So it is a win-win really. We hedged our bets at SS.. If Iggy pans out, no big deal, eat a couple Mil on Drews deal and say sayanara. If not, we won't be stuck with an abysmal offensive SS killing rallies with no clear upgrade (and yes, Drew is a clear upgrade). Same goes for Dempster, if one of our young pitchers excells and deserves to be in the MLB we can eat part of his deal and move him back to the NL OR ship doobie out (to the BP even). If we want to sign a marquee SP next offseason and our rotation is rounded out (our current 5) we can easily ship someone out and eat part of their contract without fear of hamstringing ourselves with payroll tied up in other teams. If that puts us over the luxury tax threshold in 2014 (or 2013 for that matter) no big deal all that money is freed up by 2015 anyway...... No matter how you slice it We have flexibility going forward and that is one of our biggest assets.

Free agency was not the only way to get a quality SP, and I understand the innings thing with Dempster. I get what Ben was up to, but I disagree on one thing: he did nothing proactive for the future this winter. Keeping all the prospects and draft picks was nice, but it did not make us better. All of the FAs signed will be gone or past prime by 2014 and 2015. We can not count on all of the FAs on next years list to still be available. many players extend these days.

I just can't accept that with all the money spent, not one dime helps us in 2015 or beyond, except maybe a little from SV or what we might get by trading one of these guys. I see this as a missed opportunity in a plan that seeks to make us highly competitive by 2015.

what if one of the guys we picked up this offseason is traded for a player who helps us in 2015?? Just because it doesn't look that way now doesn't mean it won't happen. We've seen these things cycle before, If Hanrahan extends that would be a move that helps us in 2015 and beyond, If Carp develops into a good 1Bman/OF'er? If Drew plays well enough to get a QO? If Dempster is traded? Holt could turn into a servicable IF'er or even Of'er (he certainly has a lot of potential)... Saying NONE of these moves helps us in 2015 and beyond is being a bit narrow minded as we don't know what the future holds. Your a poster who follows the web of player transactions very well so I know you'll catch them when/if they occur.

The way in which the free agents were obtained did help us in 2015 since no prospects were traded and no draft picks were forfeited. The free agents signed were to fill holes that couldn't be filled in any other manner and were relatively short term.

The free agents we got will not help us in 2015. That's just the truth. This whole, "we did not lose any picks" is not helping us at all, it is just keeping things the same as when the winter started. I'm talking about something that "helps us" in 2015 and hopefully beyond: nothing did that.

I realize that signing A sanchez and losing a draft pick might have effected the furture to the negative, but signing B Mccarthy to $25M/3 is but one example of what we might have done to get a pitcher who can be helpful in 2015 without losing a draft pick or by trading a prospect. Also, since pitchers with many years of team control at a low cost are in high demand, we could have signed Mccarthy and Marcum and then traded Doubront in a package to obtain a player who is under team control for 3+ years.

what if one of the guys we picked up this offseason is traded for a player who helps us in 2015??

I have mentioned that this seems to be the only redeeming value to any of our signings, but it will also take Ben to pull the trigger and essentuially "give up" on the season at the deadline, unless a kid comes up and does well somewhere giving us a surplus at a position of need to another desperate team. It could happen, but this is walking on unchartered waters. I'm all for breaking paradigms, but until it happens, I'm guessing we keep these guys to the bitter end.

Just because it doesn't look that way now doesn't mean it won't happen. We've seen these things cycle before, If Hanrahan extends that would be a move that helps us in 2015 and beyond

I liked the Hanrahan trade, since I had little faith in the prospects we gave up. I have heard he is open to extending, and if he does, that would be a help for 2015 and maybe beyond. Again, I have not given up on Ben. I am still holding out hope.

, If Carp develops into a good 1Bman/OF'er?

Yes, he is under team control until after 2016's season, but is he who you want to hang your hat on this winter?

If Drew plays well enough to get a QO?

Highly doubtful. Even if he does play great, he could be the next Lohse.

If Dempster is traded? Holt could turn into a servicable IF'er or even Of'er (he certainly has a lot of potential)... Saying NONE of these moves helps us in 2015 and beyond is being a bit narrow minded as we don't know what the future holds. Your a poster who follows the web of player transactions very well so I know you'll catch them when/if they occur.

Yes, I know some of these lesser players may spring to life and be contributors, but nothing we did this winter really made a significant difference on our outlook for 2015 and beyond. We have the same prospects and draft picks, which gives us a bright future, but this team needed to use this winter to improve our longterm outlook, but instead we kept it essentially the same, and spent all our money and efforts on the here and now.

I get why it was done. I just think we could have done one thing that significantly helped our team for 2015 and beyond... and we could have done it without giving up any future players if that is what we wanted to do. (I think we might have given up 2-3 future players for 1 better one, but that is not something I needed to happen.)

Exactly. Iggy was given a chance to earn a starting spot on the 2013 team, he didnt. Ditto for Lava. Ditto for Kalish.

Spots should be earned , not awarded.

You mean 2012.

BTW, Lava hit .429 last spring and was sent to AAA. Salty hit .222 and Shoppach .259. There was no way Lava made the team in April. He had no shot.

Iggy hit .200, and I suppose that is not good enough even for perhaps the best fiedling SS in MLB.

Aviles hit .279, so you do have a point here. Mike fielded much better than I imagined he would, so I'm not complaining that Iggy didn't start last year, although I wanted him to. I do think Iggy had a shot to beat out Mike with a great ST, but it did not happen.

I do not think Iggy has a chance this ST. Drew is the $10M dollar man, and he starts in April.

The way in which the free agents were obtained did help us in 2015 since no prospects were traded and no draft picks were forfeited. The free agents signed were to fill holes that couldn't be filled in any other manner and were relatively short term.

The free agents we got will not help us in 2015. That's just the truth. This whole, "we did not lose any picks" is not helping us at all, it is just keeping things the same as when the winter started. I'm talking about something that "helps us" in 2015 and hopefully beyond: nothing did that.

I realize that signing A sanchez and losing a draft pick might have effected the furture to the negative, but signing B Mccarthy to $25M/3 is but one example of what we might have done to get a pitcher who can be helpful in 2015 without losing a draft pick or by trading a prospect. Also, since pitchers with many years of team control at a low cost are in high demand, we could have signed Mccarthy and Marcum and then traded Doubront in a package to obtain a player who is under team control for 3+ years.

You keep mentioning Marcum...you obviously don't believe why I said he was never an option, so do a little homework. The fact that there was zero interest in the guy all winter and he ended taking a 1 yr./4 million dollar deal on January 30th, despite a solid on field resume isn't a red flag at all?! This team is trying to change the team culture (It has nothing to do with players singing kumbaya in the clubhouse), so Marcum was never an option.

what if one of the guys we picked up this offseason is traded for a player who helps us in 2015??

I have mentioned that this seems to be the only redeeming value to any of our signings, but it will also take Ben to pull the trigger and essentuially "give up" on the season at the deadline, unless a kid comes up and does well somewhere giving us a surplus at a position of need to another desperate team. It could happen, but this is walking on unchartered waters. I'm all for breaking paradigms, but until it happens, I'm guessing we keep these guys to the bitter end.

Just because it doesn't look that way now doesn't mean it won't happen. We've seen these things cycle before, If Hanrahan extends that would be a move that helps us in 2015 and beyond

I liked the Hanrahan trade, since I had little faith in the prospects we gave up. I have heard he is open to extending, and if he does, that would be a help for 2015 and maybe beyond. Again, I have not given up on Ben. I am still holding out hope.

I've also heard that he is willing to extend. really hope he does because i like this dude a lot. But you never know how a closer is going to do when coming to boston.....

, If Carp develops into a good 1Bman/OF'er?

Yes, he is under team control until after 2016's season, but is he who you want to hang your hat on this winter?

Not hang my hat on him, but he is pretty young.. i expect that he will continue to develop and get better. his 2011 season wasn't too shabby. Just another young guy to look forward to in a couple years.

If Drew plays well enough to get a QO?

Highly doubtful. Even if he does play great, he could be the next Lohse.

While i agree it is unlikely its not impossible. If he puts up great offensive numbers in fenway (certainly not outside the realm of possibility) and gives us average-above average defense a team might be interested enough to give up a draft pick. Especially considering the average offense given from the SS position.

If Dempster is traded? Holt could turn into a servicable IF'er or even Of'er (he certainly has a lot of potential)... Saying NONE of these moves helps us in 2015 and beyond is being a bit narrow minded as we don't know what the future holds. Your a poster who follows the web of player transactions very well so I know you'll catch them when/if they occur.

Yes, I know some of these lesser players may spring to life and be contributors, but nothing we did this winter really made a significant difference on our outlook for 2015 and beyond. We have the same prospects and draft picks, which gives us a bright future, but this team needed to use this winter to improve our longterm outlook, but instead we kept it essentially the same, and spent all our money and efforts on the here and now.

i think our future is pretty damn bright as it is..(STOP BEING GREEDY LOL) we have one of the top farms in BB, a dumptruck load of cash coming off the books around the time the crop is scheduled to arrive. The next 2 years FA classes leave this one in the DUST. Definitely an ideal time to restock, not to mention we will have a much much better idea of what prospects are shoe ins and which ones are busts and will be able to supplement the team accordingly.

I get why it was done. I just think we could have done one thing that significantly helped our team for 2015 and beyond... and we could have done it without giving up any future players if that is what we wanted to do. (I think we might have given up 2-3 future players for 1 better one, but that is not something I needed to happen.)

You keep mentioning Marcum...you obviously don't believe why I said he was never an option, so do a little homework.

Stop the condecending attitude. I heard your point, and disagree. Anyone is an option if you offer enough. I realize Ben did not want him, so "he never was an option", but any deal he did not make was not an option and we should just never discuss anything then, huh?

The fact that there was zero interest in the guy all winter and he ended taking a 1 yr./4 million dollar deal on January 30th, despite a solid on field resume isn't a red flag at all?! This team is trying to change the team culture (It has nothing to do with players singing kumbaya in the clubhouse), so Marcum was never an option.

He was an option. Every FA was. You are being too narrow minded. We are talking about theories and scenarios, and differing opinions on what could have been done. I am stating my opinion. You disagree. I'm Ok with that, but you can't seem to grasp the concept that other options were there, but were not chosen... some for very good reasons, other were debatable.